please upload: pd-pdogg

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On 11-04-24 at 09:39pm, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 06:26:37PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > On 11-04-24 at 12:16pm, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> > > 
> > > This is the key part: for most pd externals, the makefile is 
> > > essentially the same. Does it make sense to centralize that? What 
> > > do others think?
> > 
> > Do you mean using CDBS for more of the pd packages, or reinventing 
> > CDBS on top of short-form dh, or something else?
> > 
> 
> afaiu, it's more about replacing the upstream build-system than about the
> actually used "debian build system".
> e.g.
> <cdbs>
> include /usr/share/cdbs/1/class/makefile.mk
> DEB_MAKE_MAKEFILE=/usr/share/pd-pkg-tools/Makefile
> </cdbs>
> 
> and
> <dh>
> %:
>         dh $@ --buildsystem=makefile
> 
> dh_auto_build_override:
> 	dh_auto_build -- -f /usr/share/pd-pkg-tools/Makefile
> </dh>
> 
> or similar (i prefer using cdbs, so i would need to read a bit more 
> about how to properly do it in dh)
> 
> the interesting question is, whether /usr/share/pd-pkg-tools/Makefile 
> is indeed a good idea and should be done; whether this makefile is 
> then used with CDBS or dh is another question personally i would be 
> fine with doing it in CDBS; however others might not agree, and hans 
> has chosen to use dh rather than cdbs, and i would rather accept his 
> decision; given that there are about 20 or more packages, and they are 
> maintained by several people (the pkgs are all maintained by p-m-m, 
> but still several people are primarily responsible for the pkgs), i 
> would thus prefer a build-system agnostic solution rather than have 
> futile discussions on vi/cdbs vs emacs/dh.
> 
> mfgasdr
> IOhannes
> 
> PS: but of course the big pro for cdbs is, that its main maintainer is 
> active here and changes get into the pkg incredibly fast - e.g. my 
> pd.mk snippet (which, to repeat myself, ended up to NOT be a 
> replacement for the upstream makefile but rather a debian build system 
> amendement)
> 
> PPS: ach ja, and of course i would gladly volunteer to do 
> pd-pkg-tools.

I fully agree with keeping most possible as a distro-agnostic upstream 
Makefile.  I was not trying to advocate CDBS here. :-)


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20110424/0b52ca03/attachment-0001.pgp>